What GM Can Learn From Toyota's Humility

October 2, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (19)

Andy Grove, one of the founders of Intel, is famous for saying that "only the paranoid survive." The long-term success of his company suggests he's right.

These days, Toyota is looking like one of the most paranoid companies on the planet. It's the world's biggest carmaker but certainly isn't coasting. The global recession has hammered sales and profitability, with Toyota losing $8.4 billion in the fiscal year that ended in March. Sales are likely to be down 18 percent more this year, with a turnaround next year looking modest at best.

[See 10 gaffes by doomed CEOs.]

That weak performance isn't surprising to anybody who has followed the woes of the U.S. auto industry. But here's something that is surprising: Toyota's CEO, Akio Toyoda, said at a recent news conference that his company is "grasping for salvation" and is deep in the grip of long-term decline. "Toyota has become too big and distant from its customers," Toyoda said grimly. Then he apologized for losing money and letting down the motoring public.

American car buyers have believed for a while that their homegrown automakers—especially the recently bankrupt Chrysler and General Motors—got too big and lost touch with their customers. But Toyota? Its products consistently rank near the top in quality and reliability. Sales in the United States are down about 29 percent so far this year, but that's roughly the same as the industry average; GM and Chrysler are down more, and BMW nearly as much.

[See how the Chevy Volt could transform driving.]

But Toyota is far more contrite than its rivals. Public apologies are traditional in Japan when a business loses its way, and for Toyota, losing billions in the Detroit tradition is a dramatic comedown. Besides, Toyota is very likely to get its act together, return to profitability, and continue its ascent. Projections by forecasting firm CSM Worldwide show Toyota gaining U.S. market share over the next several years and battling neck and neck with Ford and GM to be the top seller of cars. That would make Toyota the only foreign-based automaker ever to come close to the No. 1 spot in the world's biggest auto market.

Apologizing for missteps helps explain Toyota's success—and Detroit's decline. It's hard to imagine an American CEO apologizing for much of anything, and GM, Toyota's biggest rival, has done the opposite for years, hyping even the lamest products. GM famously predicted it would claim U.S. market share of 29 percent sometime in the early 21st century and reach earnings of $10 per share. Instead, its market share has dwindled to about 19 percent, and the company recorded historic losses before declaring bankruptcy. For 20 years, GM has maintained that eight divisions—five more than Toyota—was the right number, until it was on the verge of bankruptcy, when four divisions suddenly seemed like the right number. And, of course, former CEO Rick Wagoner insisted that bankruptcy would be ruinous, instead pleading for an open-ended lifeline from the federal government; four months after declaring bankruptcy, GM seems to be doing OK.

[See the best and worst bailouts of the past two years.]

GM has received about $51 billion in taxpayer aid, and it's unlikely that the company will be able to repay all of it. Yet there have been no apologies for the colossal destruction of shareholder wealth or the dependence on public funds. Sure, there's a certain theatricality to a public apology, which is no substitute for a sound business strategy. But humility at least shows you're aware of the problem and taking responsibility for it.

GM, by contrast, has been as jaunty and proud as ever since its quick emergence from bankruptcy. The company is right that its products are improving, but there's still too much hype coming from Detroit. There was a big flourish when GM rolled out its program to sell cars on eBay this summer, an effort that has quietly ended with no significant sales. GM is touting the forthcoming Chevy Volt as a wundercar that will get more than 100 miles per gallon, yet there are questions about cost, practicality, and reliability. GM still seems to believe it can convince skeptics if its executives are insistent enough. Less bravado, and even some paranoia, might work better.

Tags:
General Motors,
car manufacturers,
Toyota

Reader Comments Read all comments (19)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

June 1, 2012 marked the day that GM announced their plan to reduce their pension liability by an expected 26 billion dollars. New changes have been outlined in a guide at the following website: http://www.gm-pension-buyout.com. Some of the plan changes include an option for select salaried U.S. retirees to receive a lump-sum offer, while other qualified retirees have the option to continue receiving monthly pension benefit payments. It is strongly recommended that affected retirees and surviving beneficiaries seek advice from a qualified financial advisor before making any final decisions.

Farnandas of AZ 2:44AM June 16, 2012

My issue with comments made about Toyota is the fact that the defective parts were not made by Toyota. The cars were made in North America and the Parts came from a local supplier. It also came out later that the same parts were used in GM and Ford vehicles and they also had to issue a recall. It was not as big and not as public. We have found since, that trying to purchase a new car from a company without recalls is impossible. There is no such thing as a perfect track record, and I commend the auto industry for having such a process, and that it is fairly quick. Unfortunately we do not seem to have as adequate a process for food and other items on the market.

If Toyota had stuck to their 3 p's (production, preparation and process) and kept manufacturing on home ground I think they would never have faced this issue.

But because they are known for great cars that go and go and go, it was inevitable that they would have to expand to meet demand.

I would still purchase a Toyota, Honda, or Hyundai over a North American vehicle anyday. They are built smarter, their accessories and layouts of the interiors are better, definitely more user friendly. And on average they still outlast an American car with just basic maintainence. My husband is still driving an 80' civic that runs perfectly while my parents have finally after 30 some years given up on GM and purchased a Toyota Sienna; they were sick of their GM vehicles conking out at 100,000 km.

Pat 5:12PM November 04, 2010

Has anyone driven through Detroit lately? Probably not unless you're purchasing drugs or getting the hell out of there. Well America, what do you think of your f*n unions now? The high cost of manufacturing goods in this country (because of the F'N UNIONS!) has driven all manufacturing jobs overseas. Both Democrats and Republicans are at fault here, for sure. Just let them leave the shores without so much as a wave goodbye. The fact that other countries manipulate their currencies to favor themselves (we cannot because the Federal Reserve is independent, remember?) When other countires slap a VAT tax (Value added tax) on all American goods coming into their country and then give that tax to their own countries (competitor of American companies, ie tax GM and give to BMW), rendering equal value American goods too expensive for other countries to purchase our exports while their imports pack great value for the dollar. The Chinese are forced to prop up America now, (otherwise their investment dollars would become useless). A VAT tax or currency equivalizer tax on chinese imports would even hurt American companies - in the short term - but ultimately bring jobs back home, where they belong, on our shores, fighting fairly, instead of blindly. America is not the economic engine anymore, we will be regulated to former a former economic 'bully as China and India compete for more of the worlds resources in the coming decades. China has not fought in a (major) war in decades, same as Russia, (since Afghanistan), saving those countries untold TRILLIONS! I wish our government would 'get it' and pull troops out of all countries now, pour the savings back into America. Fight all 'world wars' as they are being fought now more and more (and that is economically). Regardless of the outcome the world will benefit, from the innovation, the competition, and the prosperity.

edgy of FL 11:18PM November 14, 2009

Rick Newman

Rick Newman

The global economy is mysterious, even scary. Chief Business Correspondent Rick Newman connects the dots. In addition to his writing for U.S. News, Rick is the co-author of two books: Firefight: Inside the Battle to Save the Pentagon on 9/11, and Bury Us Upside Down: The Misty Pilots and the Secret Battle for the Ho Chi Minh Trail.


Read Rick's latest blog entries here.

advertisement

advertisement